Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reports Best Non-Holiday Quarter Ever With $5.99 Billion Profit for Q2 2011
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think Apple's financial results would have been better if they had more iPad 2's to sell.
Unfortunately, we could see a worse-off quarter for Apple the next time because the effects of the parts shortages from Japan may start affecting the bottom line, despite what Apple claims currently.
Unfortunately, we could see a worse-off quarter for Apple the next time because the effects of the parts shortages from Japan may start affecting the bottom line, despite what Apple claims currently.
Another great quarter.
Regarding the cash on hand situation, which now sits at around $65 Billion... I remember Steve was quoted somewhere as saying (and this was a long time ago, maybe a decade or so) that he always wants enough cash on hand to run a company in the red for <blank> years before going bankrupt. I say <blank> because I can't remember the figure he used.. This may tie into why there is so much cash in reserve beyond the normal amount a company should have for acquisitions, emergencies, etc etc... Apple makes a lot of cash, but also spends a lot just to run the company.
Also.... I'll just leave this here:
Regarding the cash on hand situation, which now sits at around $65 Billion... I remember Steve was quoted somewhere as saying (and this was a long time ago, maybe a decade or so) that he always wants enough cash on hand to run a company in the red for <blank> years before going bankrupt. I say <blank> because I can't remember the figure he used.. This may tie into why there is so much cash in reserve beyond the normal amount a company should have for acquisitions, emergencies, etc etc... Apple makes a lot of cash, but also spends a lot just to run the company.
Also.... I'll just leave this here:
I hope all of the big oil companies have a record year for profits too. It's worth it to me to pay $4 gal for gas to help it come true.
Actually, companies which are not prostituting themselves out to the market don't pay dividends (at least in the US).
Dividends is just a way to make yourself poorer, what with the double taxation that is involved.
Stay away from companies paying dividends (about the only time it makes sense is a stable company like MS, during a downturn).
Key to take away from this Report is:
besides the great Success Apple has had these court proceedings vs Samsung is going to be costly EITHER way.
It's HIGH time Apple boost internal knowledge and production from chip source Intrinsity or look to the big dogs:
Texas Instruments: Big Dog
NVidia: strong roll-out giving the Big Dog a run for its colar.
Freescale: great at low power consumption yet they need to innovate (former division of Motorola's PowerPC department)
etc.
besides the great Success Apple has had these court proceedings vs Samsung is going to be costly EITHER way.
It's HIGH time Apple boost internal knowledge and production from chip source Intrinsity or look to the big dogs:
Texas Instruments: Big Dog
NVidia: strong roll-out giving the Big Dog a run for its colar.
Freescale: great at low power consumption yet they need to innovate (former division of Motorola's PowerPC department)
etc.
Yes and if Apple gave away iOS for free to all the OEMs then i'm sure Apple would be right up their with Android in market share. Heck, while Apple was at it they might as well spend all their earnings like Google did last quarter. What's Google's stock price right now??...PATHETIC thats what.
I enjoyed this post immensely. Everybody--everybody--here, has "clients".
I enjoyed this post immensely as well. As someone in the chemical/nuclear engineering industry, my clients always gripe and complain about corporate greed when big bad oil makes $10 billion in profit in a quarter, but when Apple does it everyone sings their praises as their money goes right into Steve Jobs's bank account and talks about how great it is that the money they've worked for sits somewhere cross-country in the form of numbers on paper.
What I do know though, is that the Apple computers I've had have been the most unreliable machines I've ever used, and that stock is going to be hit hard sooner or later when Steve checks out. Given his high visibility, that stock will go down quite a bit when he dies, and the double-edge to that sword is that given his high visibility, it may have trouble recovering in the wake.
Apple also hasn't made a decent iPod since the 5G nano. Apple doesn't care about the iPod, that's certainly clear with a 17% decline YoY...I noticed nobody's talking about that in this thread. Their last iPod nano was nothing but a travesty, I'd hardly call that "innovating". Stuck at 16 GB for the last three years is pathetic, too.
"Steve Jobs' bank account" eh? You appear not to know how corporations work.
And if my money is going to line someone's pockets, I'd rather it be someone who returns the favor by making my life more enjoyable rather than someone who will gouge me for a natural resource I need to transport me to the job to earn the money to pay for that natural resource, exploiting every war and rumor of war to charge me ever more for the privilege.
I hope the oil companies make huge profits too. Without them, I wouldn't have gas to drive to work. So what if gas is $5 a gallon, they work hard to get that oil out of the ground. Same for my electric company. They provide me with some high tech electricity to power my Apple products. And the supermarkets, for selling me food so I can survive. They truly deserve to make billions. Same for the health insurance companies. I'd like to see BCBS make at least 5 billion a quarter for providing my health care.
The numbers in graphs:
http://www.macworld.com/article/159363/2011/04/apple_2q_earnings_2011.html
I'm very surprised at the strong iPhone sales. I had never expected this change of pace in Q4 2010 and onwards when Android competition has been stronger than ever.
It's interesting to note that the Mac sales have followed the iPhone sales although with less wildly rocketing sales. Clearly a synergy effect here.
Those worried about the Mac can take comfort in that they're still making better revenue than the iPad.
Additionally - when the iPads have been on the rise, the Macs have been too.
http://www.macworld.com/article/159363/2011/04/apple_2q_earnings_2011.html
I'm very surprised at the strong iPhone sales. I had never expected this change of pace in Q4 2010 and onwards when Android competition has been stronger than ever.
It's interesting to note that the Mac sales have followed the iPhone sales although with less wildly rocketing sales. Clearly a synergy effect here.
Those worried about the Mac can take comfort in that they're still making better revenue than the iPad.
Additionally - when the iPads have been on the rise, the Macs have been too.
Last edited:
Android isn't hurting iPhone sales, in my opinion. Because Apple can't even meet demand and is continuing to grow at crazy speeds.
Why should they make good quality headphones? Seriously, I really don't think that makes any sense for apple or the consumer. Just think about it. Anyone who is serious about getting a nice music listening experience with their iPods will buy some good headphones or did already anyway. So when apple adds high quality headphones to their ipod line (making every ipod cost like 50 EUR more) everyone who already has headphones they like very much (For example I bought some Shures for 100 EUR) would be very very pissed off at buying useless headphones for 50 EUR they never wanted to buy.
As much as I see that a high quality product such as the iPod classic is bundled with something as cheap as the apple earbuds, I just don't want to be forced in buying an expensive headphone which I probably won't like (sound or comfort). Imagine buying a new amplifier for your hifi system and they come bundled with what the producer thought were okay speakers.
Just wanted to clarify that one as this is a very common complain about the iPod line which I just don't see at all.
Great figures, especially for the PC sales.
The desktop is coming to an end. I'm not surprised - the current 2011 laptops make even better desktop ( exclude Mac Pro ) replacements than before... the graphic cards is the weakspot though.
If Apple sold just over a million desktops, I wonder how many of them where Mac Pros ( so I wonder how long until Apple ditch those :-( ).
The desktop is coming to an end. I'm not surprised - the current 2011 laptops make even better desktop ( exclude Mac Pro ) replacements than before... the graphic cards is the weakspot though.
If Apple sold just over a million desktops, I wonder how many of them where Mac Pros ( so I wonder how long until Apple ditch those :-( ).
Why should Ferrari put good tires on their cars?
Just think about it; here's a company championing (used to, anyway) their music player and how great the experience was, but then at the same time made sure that the final product (the music that enters your head) sounds like total ass because of 10 cent headphones they include with their premium product.
Same thing applies to Ferrari--why build an awesome car that's made for great performance, and then put 10 cent tires on it, resulting in a poor final product in terms of end-user experience?
A premium music player is useless without good headphones, just as a premium car is useless without good tires.
Putting crappy headphones in the box of a premium priced/marketed product is an oxymoron, and a bit of an insult to the consumer. And spare the "Oh but that would cost too much for the consumer", because that wouldn't exactly flow with everyone praising a $6B profit quarter.
What would be the alternative? Put some Dr. Dre head phones in the box and have the iPod cost $80 more? To what end?
Very few people care about the quality of the headphones that come with iPods. For those that do, they can buy nice set of headphones and not worry about the 10 cent ones that Apple puts in the box.
If Apple put in a half decent set of headphones and increased the price by, say $20, the folks that want even better headphones would complain that they have to pay an extra $20 for headphones they'll never use.
Last edited:
The stock market is benefitting from AAPL. I think the revision of AAPL's influence on the market will be reevaluated again.
This is exactly my point--here we are saying that tons of people would complain about paying an extra $20 for headphones that weren't total garbage, but we are also saying how great it is that Apple sticks 6 billion dollars in the bank for three months' work, free and clear. So which is it? You want to line the pockets of the richest of the rich further, or you don't want to pay the extra $20 for decent headphones?
I'm a capitalist, so I'm going to side with Apple on this one. For me, if/when I buy an iPod, the standard (read crappy) headphones are fine. I don't expect Apple to include decent headphones (and eat the costs) when everyone else includes the same crappy headphones. It's not good business. Apple is in business to make money for the shareholders. Sometimes, business decisions can be beneficial to the shareholders and the consumers, but when it's an either-or sitiuation, the shareholder is gonna win.
The fact that Apple is raking in huge profits is irrelevant in the argument as you've framed. Including decent headphones at the same overall price would do very little to increase sales, but it would hurt the bottom line. Adding in other "marketable" features while keeping costs the same would, in theory, increase sales, so they would make up for the losses with higher volumes.
But I do understand your point. I'm still pissed that no one includes a USB cable with a new printer.